[perryizgr8]

I'm voting with my attention, I won't click on Twitter links as far as possible, won't tweet or retweet. I won't post anything on Facebook, won't reply to any messages on Messenger. If they can censor, I can choose to ignore their "platform". I'd suggest anybody else who cares about free speech do the same.

[mewse]

Things get flagged and removed on HN with some degree of regularity, for what it’s worth.

[perryizgr8]

The day HN's moderation becomes as blatantly biased as Twitter is, I'll leave HN too.

[aww_dang]

I don't always agree, but on the balance HN's moderation is pretty good.

[nwienert]

HN moderators are far more active in terms of bending outcomes by percent of total. They regularly remove political discussion even if somewhat relevant, and honestly the flag feature is broken and needs a higher threshold and better counter flag measures. You just don’t notice it because it happens quickly and then the article disappears.

They should have the ability to see flagged content, especially content that got a good number of votes before flagging, you’d be surprised.

[aww_dang]

I see dead posts. I also habitually look to the bottom of the page, where the controversial opinions are. New submissions are usually more diverse than the home page.

There's very little sport in defending an establishment or consensus position. As they say, if everyone is thinking the same thing, then someone isn't thinking. There's almost nothing to discuss if we all agree.

There's a fair amount of downvoted and flagged content I agree with. It doesn't stop me from reading it. Like Twitter's "fact checks", it draws my attention. There are some topics where even if I agree I can see how those who disagree are incapable of discussing it without devolving into an all out flame war.

The real horror show are HN's shadowbanned accounts. 99% of those are awful.